Articles and Studies

A thoughtful, well researched and timely article by Annelie Fitzgerald:
Sally Beare, How green is 5G?

August 2021:

NB. New Date Order list:* (most recent at the top)

Former numbered list:

1. Reviews on Environmental Health

2. Foerster_EHP_2018

3. The Prevalence of People With Restricted Access to Work in Man-Made Electromagnetic Environments

4. Wi-Fi – Continuing Concerns
5. Wi-Fi in the Classroom – Health Advice to Schools
We have put this diagram together with two of Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy’s  papers so that the reader can cross-reference between them and  Dr. Richard Gautier’s diagram. We suggest printing all three. Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy is a Lecturer in Biology (retired). Imperial College London.

6.  The Biological Effects of Weak Electromagnetic Fields
7.  The Dangers of Electromagnetic Smog
8.  Diagrams of Mechanisms Linked to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Exposure
9.  Wi-Fi in Schools
Two new recent and important studies have found that electromagnetic fields from Wi-Fi transmitters can alter electrical brain activity and decrease a measure of attention in young adults when performing a memory task. These are the first reports to look at the effects of Wi-Fi on brain function.  The attractiveness of Wi-Fi as a learning tool in schools is significantly decreased if it could be damaging the cognitive abilities and brain development of pupils.  The studies used a Wi-Fi access point (1.5m away), giving a field strength of 0.49V/m. This is well within the exposures experienced by someone using a Wi-Fi enabled laptop.
More information

  Wi-Fi in Schools – Dr Andrew Goldsworthy
Andrew Goldsworthy BSc PhD is a retired lecturer from Imperial College London. He spent most of his career there, where he taught and researched a variety of topics ranging from plant and animal physiology and biochemistry to the ways in which living organisms use weak electric currents to control their growth and metabolism. These currents are due to specific ions flowing through cell membranes in a highly controlled way. Much of his work was on calcium ions, which are important in the control of metabolism and in maintaining the stability of cell membranes.  His studies involved making measurements of the weak natural currents flowing into and out of living cells, looking at the ways in which artificial electric currents and electromagnetic fields affected them and also their consequences for normal growth and development. Following his retirement in 2004, he took a special interest in the effects of the radiation from mobile telecommunications on both animals and plants. The effects observed on plants preclude any possibility that they are of psychosomatic origin.

1. The heating effect.

We cannot assume that the heating effect is uniformly distributed through living cells. The cells themselves are highly conductive, whereas the cell membranes have a very high resistance . Therefore, for any given current flowing through a tissue, nearly all of the heat will be generated in the cell membranes. Since these membranes constitute only about one thousandth of the total diameter of a typical cell and virtually all of the heat is being generated in them, the ICNIRP Guidelines, which are based on the assumption that calls and tissues are uniformly conductive, are approximately one thousand times too high. Perhaps you would like to comment on this.

2 The effect of modulation.

Living cell membranes are electrically non-linear and have a voltage across them of approximately 70mV. They are pierced by countless ion channels that behave like electrically biased Schottky diodes capable of rectifying and so demodulating any alternating signal (including microwave frequencies) with the demodulated low frequency components appearing between the inside and outside of the cell. This is what does most of the damage and here is why.

The cell membrane is mainly made of a lipid bilayer only about 10nM thick, with proteins such as ion channels “floating” in it. The membrane itself is negatively charged because it has outwardly directed negatively charged phosphate groups and is normally stabilised by divalent positive calcium and magnesium ions that cross-link them. But the demodulated cell-phone signal makes the negative membrane and its protective divalent ions move in opposite directions. This destabilizes the membrane and makes it more likely to perforate and collapse the voltage gradient across it. This, in turn,opens voltage-gated calcium ion channels in the membrane that let huge numbers of calcium ions into the cell down a massive 10,000:1 electrochemical gradient.

In nature, this increase in the internal calcium concentration is taken as an indicator to the cell that its membrane (and by implication, the whole cell) has been damaged and sets in train a series of repair mechanisms, which uses a great deal of metabolic energy. If it succeeds, the cell is repaired, if not, the cell dies, but either way a great deal of energy is used. This may in large part explain the chronic fatigue syndrome that found in early mobile phone users (Yuppie flu) and is now much more widespread in the community due to our constant exposure to cordless phones, their base stations, WiFi and all the other wireless devices that current ICNIRP guidelines regard as safe.

Lastly, the relationship between 5G and COVID-19.

We cannot assume that because the 5G radiation is mainly absorbed by the skin that it cannot damage the rest of our bodies. If the energy of the radiation is disproportionately absorbed by the skin then the damage to the skin and the blood and lymph circulating through it will also be disproportionately large. The effects of 5G on lymphocytes could be particularly damaging. They too will have their energy drained by the calcium influx caused by the radiation, have less to spare to generate their protective antibodies and so make the immune system less efficient. So, I guess you could say that 5G can promote the spread of COVID-19. That said, most other forms of information carrying (i.e.modulated) frequencies may be even more dangerous, particularly WiFi with its extremely low frequency (10Hz) beacon signal being possibly the most dangerous.

Yours sincerely

Dr Andrew Goldsworthy

Lecturer and Biological Safety Officer (retired)

Imperial College London

12.   Biologists Guide to Mobile Phone Signals

13.  How smart meters may cause Autism and Cancer – Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy July 2011.
14.  WHO recognizes electromagnetic dangers: let us declare human health rights
15.  Microwave News – A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation

6th September 2016:

In Microwave News: An article on the release of the significant draft report on US National Toxicology Programme which showed strong evidence for the genotoxicity of cell phone radiation. Read article here:>

16.  Is Wi-Fi Safe for Children
– Beware of Health Risks

17. Is wifi making your child ill? – The Telegraph

18.  WiFi radiation in schools-Teachers,employers
19.  Will it soon be too late? Cancer expected to increase by 70% This paper was written by Prof. Olle Johansson upon the release of the World Cancer Report 2014

20. 31st August 2016.

Article in Time magazine by Dr Nicholas Kardaras who writes:
“Screens in schools are a $60 billion hoax. Tech in the classroom not only leads to worse educational outcomes for kids, which I will explain shortly, it can also clinically hurt them.” Read Article.




24.  An important and thought-provoking study by The Planetary Health Alliance  >  here

25. Injuries from Wireless Radiation-Action Needed-1

26. 5G or not 5G? An extremely informative and thought-provoking article by Simon Hodges:

4G, Fake 5G and Real 5G – Know the Differences

27. July 25th 2016

Latest news from France.

28June 16th 2016

News Archive –  ‎
Microwave News reports: Cell Phone Radiation Boosts Cancer Rates in Animals.
$25 Million National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study Finds Brain Tumours.

29. April 20th 2016

30. April 19th 2016

31. May 11th 2015.

32. May 9th 2015.

33. June 2020

34. Oct 2020